Film Review: Kingsman: The Secret Service

Cockney's Royale

To say Matthew Vaughn has had a rather entertaining film career would be a slight understatement. Shooting to the attention of many after producing Guy Ritchie's, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels in 1998, Vaughn has had a directed a wonderful array of films so far, with Layer Cake, Kick-Ass, and X-Men: First Class, all being particularly brilliant. Now we have Kingsman: The Secret Service, a film so unavoidable, particularly in my local Vue cinema, where trailers have been hyping it extensively for the past month or so, which in my own experience, is a risky business, with this level of hype more than often leading to a rather high expectation level from cinema goers such as myself. So as I walked into an empty, late-night, EXTREME screening of Kingsman, the bar was set reasonably high, probably more so than any other film so far this year. Mission commence...

First off, the plot is basically Kick-Ass meets the Bond franchise, with a helping of Johnny English. which on paper, sounds pretty damn fun. To sum Kingsman up in one word however, you do not to need to stray far from the film's choice of music; it's completely bonkers, with it's ultra-violent tendencies, including a wonderful Scanners-esque death scene, and ludicrous plot, albeit stealing riffs from 28 Days Later, Stephen King's Cell, and even Channel 4's wonderful Utopia, making it a highly entertaining couple of hours,.Furthermore, it's clear to see the amount of fun everyone involved in the film were having, particularly Colin Firth who makes the most out of playing the suave, smooth and exquisitely dressed Kingsman agent Harry Hart, perhaps making up for his lost opportunity at playing 007 himself*.

Amidst all the fun however, the film does have it's weaknesses. Firstly, it's not as good, or as funny as, Kick-Ass, where comparisons to such are inevitable. In fact, I laughed a lot less than I thought I might, which only results in seeing the flaws within the film much easier, especially in certain scenes when the film is attempting to get a chuckle out of the audience and falls flat on its' face. Secondly, the film is all over the place, and is shot at 100mph, which in an action flick is generally acceptable, yet for some reason, in Kingsman I found it rather annoying, much like I did every Samuel L. Jackson talked (seriously, what was with that strange lisp?). These weaknesses however, are outweighed by the positives, where if for some reason you are looking for a stupid, semi-funny, action spy romp, Kingsman is definitely the film for you. 

Part Johnny English, part Kick-Ass, Kingsman is pretty much what it says on the tin. Funny? Sort of. Action-packed? Most definitely. Violent? Unbelievably. Until the next time Mr. Vaughn...

Overall Score: 7/10

* http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/colin-firth-kingsman-the-secret-service-star-on-netflix-bridget-jones-3-and-why-the-james-bond-ship-has-sailed-9991024.html

Film Review: A Most Violent Year

Sympathy for the Devil

J. C. Chandor's, A Most Violent Year, is the second of two films released in the past week, the first being Ex Machina, that include Star Wars -bound Oscar Isaac, who is slowly becoming one of my favourite actors. I first noticed Isaac when watching Inside Llewyn Davis, yet after looking at his back catalogue, it's surprising to see the wide range of films he has been a part of, such as Drive and two Ridley Scott efforts; Robin Hood and Body of Lies respectively, all of which are pretty fab, particularly, Drive. Similarly, Jessica Chastain also seems to be in films that particularly appeal to me, such as Zero Dark Thirty, and most recently, Interstellar, yet the third cog in this particular wheel, director J, C. Chandor, hasn't won me over, yet, with his last effort, All Is Lost, not enthralling me in the slightest. Still, two out of three ain't bad. 

The film is set during the latter stages of 1981 New York, a time in which, statistically, crime rates reached an all time high, particularly those consisting of a rather violent ilk, and tells the story of Abel Morales, who attempts to expand his business by purchasing a new, and valuable, piece of land. In the background however, his oil trucks are repeatedly being stolen and sold on, whilst the DA, played by Selma's, David Oyelwo, is running an investigation into potential illegal activity within his empire. Within my review for Ex Machina, I stated Isaac's performance was, "top notch," and the same can be said for his performance in this film, with his portrayal of a character, who, although the title suggests otherwise, attempts to stay within the boundaries of the law despite all of the ongoing threats to him and his business, being simply brilliant.

Adding to this brilliance, is Jessica Chastain, who plays the role of Anna Morales superbly, and who, in contrast to her husband, is no stranger to violence thanks to her father's gangster background. The chemistry between the two leads is explosive, and helps develop the way in which each character changes throughout the course of the movie, particularly Abel, who transforms from an almost reluctant hero into a no-nonsense hard-man. These strong performances help keep the film going, particularly when it is at its' weakest, with the rather shallow plot taking a while to kick in, and just slightly stretching its' two-hour run-time.

Overall, A Most Violent Year, is J. C. Chandor's best film to date, helped particularly by two terrific performances from Isaac and Chastain. Although its' rather simple plot is stretched into the film's run-time, the film is an entertaining and gripping crime drama that can stand strong next to other films in the same genre. 

Overall Score: 8/10

87th Academy Awards: Best Supporting Actor

Oscars 2015: Best Supporting Actor

We are now on to the penultimate blog regarding this years Oscars ceremony, the focus of which is  on the "Best Supporting Actor" category, featuring Hulk, Hamlet, J. Jonah Jameson, Tom Hagen and, oddly, Hulk again. In terms of bookies favourite, J. K. Simmons is the best bet to win the gong, and for the second time running, I completely agree with them. His performance as the ferocious Terrence Fletcher in Whiplash, transformed a film with a rather simple and, dare I say it, boring plot, into the most gripping cinematic experience I have witnessed in a long while. Hats off to him. As an added extra, I wouldn't be surprised to see either Edward Norton or Ethan Hawke, pick up the award instead, for their roles in Birdman and Boyhood respectively, highlighting the strength of the nominations in this particular category this year. In terms of overlooked, James Gandolfini for The Drop, and, i'm calling it, Dave Bautista for Guardians of the Galaxy. That's right. Drax the Destroyer. Instead, we have:


Robert Duvall - The Judge
Ethan Hawke - Boyhood
Edward Norton - Birdman
Mark Ruffalo - Foxcatcher
J. K. Simmons - Whiplash

Next... Best Supporting Actress

Fall Out Boy - American Beauty / American Psycho - ALBUM REVIEW

Fall Out Boy is a band that I've grown up with. Witnessing their rise and popularity through Kerrang!'s publications, I always enjoyed keeping up with the squad. Although I was never an all-out fanboy, the big bangers of Sugar, We're going Down, This Ain't a Scene, It's an Arms Race & Dance, Dance are the definitive collection of FOB that were enough to keep me coming back and enjoying what they threw out but I never could see myself rushing out for a new album to add to my collection. Then it hit me in 2013 - Save Rock n' Roll jumped onto the scene with the ingenious plan of creating music videos for every song on the new album with one narrative that really captured me. At this point, I found the FOB album that I would go out and buy, the one that I can play endlessly without it going stale.

If you want to read my review of Save Rock n' Roll, Click HERE

Obviously, I was extremely excited to follow the developments of American Beauty and loved the full album release on Youtube. What defined the previous album was a compilation of featuring talents and obviously a Rock inspired composition. Now, FOB turn the tide with an album that has electronic flares, no featuring artists and a definitive style. With the bands desire to appeal to more than just the rocker community, they have diversified their style and blended catchy riffs and chorus' that'll have you itching for another fix. Its move into the mainstream music means a reliance on synth and auto-tune, albeit well balanced and not as potent as T-Pain's catalogue but a level of which seems out of place and character.

As ever, certain songs jump out to me. Centuries is the first single released then you have The Kids Aren't Alright and Uma Thurman that have some awesome sampling and little titbits that add individuality to each tune. Technically, the variation is great, each song is its own, flows well in and out of the structured playlist with alternating tones and emotions. Stump's vocal range and style is brilliant and flourishes with the backing vocals of his band mates, although we cannot define whose voice is whose. Although it is minor, I feel that they have been cut out and replaced.

The album is solid. Its loud, rhythmic and a must for any fan. Yet, we have the issue of length and with albums, the bigger, the better. American Beauty has fallen even shorter than Save Rock n' Roll with just less than 40 minutes. Its this sort of length which means albums can finish so quick, you didn't have time tidy yourself up. Although its move to a more mainstream audience has led some of their older fans to get their knickers in a twist, I feel that Fall Out Boy are pushing boundaries within the rocker scene and American Beauty extends these further. However, at this moment, I don't feel that this album is as diverse and exciting as Save Rock n' Roll and lean towards giving this outing a 7.5/10 in the hope it will grow on me like its predecessor and may warrant a higher score. Its ambition is reported positive and I'm inclined to agree with some of these groups out there.

Film Review: Ex Machina

I, Robot

Another week, another bunch of brand new film releases, with this weeks' most anticipated (for me anyway) being Alex Garland's Ex Machina, starring Domhnall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac, both of whom are set to star in that little thing called Star Wars which is out later this year. After discovering Garland had wrote screenplays for both 28 Days Later and Dredd, both of which I love, I was instantly compelled to go and see his latest effort, and his directorial debut. Off we go... 

For the plot, I will try not to give too much away, (I went in to the showing hardly knowing anything) so I will stick to the basic premise which is laid out within the trailer. After Domhnall Gleeson's character, Caleb, wins a competition to spend a week with the CEO of his company, "Bluebook", he soon becomes part of a groundbreaking experiment that focuses on Ava, an AI created by Oscar Issac's character, Nathan, and is asked to determine whether it is capable of exhibiting human behaviour by means of the Turing test. First off, Ex Machina, benefits slightly from last year's release of The Imitation Game, which documented the life of Alan Turing, so those who saw it may indeed have the upper hand already in understanding the basis of the test used in the film. In terms of similarities between the films however, they most certainly end there as Ex Machina is a creepy and claustrophobic, proper sci-fi film, reminiscent of last years' Under the Skin, which I named my top film of 2014. Good start...

Much like Under the Skin, Ex Machina, relies on an overall sense of isolation, with each having very little cast, and both focusing on the differences of what is is to be human against what it is to be considered the "other" or the "outsider". In the context of Under the Skin, the "other" was an alien who had taken the form of Scarlet Johansson, whereas in Ex Machina, the other can arguably be recognised as the AI Ava or Nathan, whose paranoid and untrustworthy tendencies have pushed him into a reclusive lifestyle, where the interaction with Caleb only succeeds through Caleb signing his freedom away. Literally. The secluded nature of the film gives it an overarching feeling of forthcoming dread, especially in the scenes where we witness power cuts, where the sense of danger is emphasised by the colour changes from natural to a bold, blood-like red. 

The film also includes top-notch performances from Isaac and Gleeson, but it is Alicia Vikander's portrayal as AI Ava that really steals the show, so much so that it would have been interesting to see if her, or the film in general, would have been recognised by the Oscars if it had been released only a few months earlier. Although the film does suffer slightly from being rather too slow in places, it is strong and effective addition to the sci-fi genre. I look forward to seeing Mr. Garland again.

Overall Score: 8/10

87th Academy Awards: Best Director

Oscars 2015: Best Director

Next on this dedicated Oscar blog is the "Best Director" category, which this year primarily consists of  rather "indie" filmmakers such as Richard Linklater, famous for films such as Dazed and Confused, A Scanner Darkly, and, of course, School of Rock, and Wes Anderson, responsible for The Royal Tenenbaums and The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. Once again, Boyhood is tipped by the bookies to win in for this category, meaning Richard Linklater will be walking home with the Oscar, and for the first time in this blog, I agree with them, although I do have a soft spot for for Mr. Anderson as The Grand Budapest Hotel is a quite brilliant and bonkers movie. In terms of those who may have been overlooked, Christopher Nolan for Interstellar, which I personally thought was brilliant, and Jonathan Glazer for Under the Skin. The nominations are:

Wes Anderson - The Grand Budapest Hotel
Alejandro González Iñárritu - Birdman
Richard Linklater - Boyhood
Bennett Miller - Foxcatcher
Morten Tyldum - The Imitation Game

Next... Best Supporting Actor

87th Academy Awards: Best Actress

Oscars 2015: Best Actress

And now on to the "Best Actress" category which this year features actresses who may have shown off their acting skills in films that might have just slipped under the radar of the average cinema goer. A prime example is Marion Cotillard in Two Days, One Night, which I admit to not having seen until I began writing this blog and thus decided to catch up with. In terms of bookies favourite, Julianne Moore is tipped to win for her performance as Dr. Alice Howland in Still Alice, even though she equally could have been nominated for her freakish performance in David Cronenberg's Maps to the Stars which also came out last year. 'Tis was a good year for Ms. Moore. On the subject of freakish, my own nod goes to Rosamund Pike for her portrayal of Amazing Amy in Gone Girl which (without spoilers) was spine-tingling. I'm not too sure Neil Patrick Harris will want to see her again at the Oscars. For the overlooked category, Essie Davis in last year's brilliant The Babadook, who sadly, hasn't had a sniff in this year's main ceremonies anywhere. But you know, whether if its in a word, or if its' in a book, you can't get rid of the Babadook. Here are the nominations:

Marion Cotillard - Two Days, One Night
Felicity Jones - The Theory of Everything
Julianne Moore - Still Alice
Rosamund Pike - Gone Girl
Reese Witherspoon - Wild


Next... Best Director

87th Academy Awards: Best Actor

Oscars 2015: Best Actor

Second on this Oscar blog, is the Best Actor category, which features some brilliant performances, particularly from the two British representatives, Benedict Cumberbatch and Eddie Redmayne (Or benedict XCuebrvatch and Eddie Redmaybe, as the Guardian call them*) portraying the iconic Alan Turing and Stephen Hawking respectively. In terms of bookies favourite, Michael Keaton is top of the list for this years gong, for his portrayal of Riggan Thompson in Birdman. In terms of my own particular choice, it's hard to shy away from Eddie Redmayne, whose transformative performance as Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything is just a wonder to behold, and after winning the Golden Globe, where for the last three years the winner has gone on to win the Oscar, it wouldn't be a surprise to see him lift the golden guy next month. In the category of "overlooked", is Ralph Fiennes in The Grand Budapest Hotel, Brendan Gleeson in Calvary, and unbelievably Jake Gyllenhaal, for both Enemy and Nightcrawler. Don't worry Jake, I thing you're fab. Anyway, we have:

Benedict Cumberbatch - The Imitation Game

Bradley Cooper - American Sniper

Eddie Redmayne - The Theory of Everything

Michael Keaton - Birdman

Steve Carell - Foxcatcher

Next... Best Actress

* https://twitter.com/wittertainment/status/555723125498056704

Film Review: American Sniper

Born In The USA

Now that the Oscar nominations have been let loose on the world, it is time for me to catch up on all the films that I haven't seen which have been nominated for 'Best Picture'. Beginning my journey, albeit a very small one with only three films needing to be watched, is American Sniper, the new movie directed by The Man With No Name, starring Bradley Cooper, last heard as a gun-toting raccoon in last years' wonderful Guardians of the Galaxy. Shall we begin?

American Sniper focuses on the life of Chris Kyle, the "deadliest marksman in US military history", who during his time as a Navy Seal, racked up 255 kills. 160 of which were confirmed, whilst attempting to highlight the effects war can have on soldiers, both in a wartime environment and a 'normal' one. The word, "attempting", is probably the key fulcrum on which this review is based as the movie fails to paint a picture of how horrific war actually is, and instead, relies too many times on scenes that go full-on Call of Duty, with Black Hawk Down being the obvious inspiration, which in my mind, is something I have seen too many times before. 

In terms of the good, Bradley Cooper does a solid job portraying Kyle, whilst Sienna Miller, who subsequently has seemingly reappeared out of nowhere in American Sniper and Foxcatcher, does an equally as good job playing the role of the estranged wife who is caught between Kyle's love for her and his love for war. Aside from the two Kyles, the rest of the film is seemingly enriched with 2-D characters who come and go in relatively forgettable fashion, whilst the contrast between Kyle and the enemy sniper is rather poorly done and should have had more depth in order for me to actually care for the twisted relationship between the two. The word "depth", in general, springs to mind, as their simply wasn't enough in this film to justify its' two hour plus run-time, and it seemed to drag on and not really grip me like I wished it would. 

Overall, American Sniper, is a solid, yet unspectacular, flag-waving war film that attempts to show the true horrors and effects of war yet only succeeds in falling flat on its' face. Although it has been nominated for "Best Picture" at the forthcoming Oscars, it is probably the weakest of all the films in that category and in my opinion, should easily be replaced by Foxcatcher. 

Overall Score: 6/10

87th Academy Awards: Best Picture

Oscars 2015: Best Picture

It's Award Season! Grab the coffee, get the red bull and ready the doughnuts, the annual celebrity get-together is within touching distance, and i'm rather excited. Last year's ceremony was rather splendid,  with Ellen DeGeneres keeping all of the Hollywood egos in check, supported by a wonderful raft of movies to celebrate and John Travolta introducing Adele Dazeem. This year promises to be another spectacular affair, with Neil Patrick Harris hosting and a wonderful array of films to spur on during this particular race. Within this blog I will be focusing on this year's nominations, selecting the favourite in each category, along with my personal choices and nominations that may have been overlooked. So sit down, relax, and enjoy the ride...

Best Picture

Starting off this particular blog is, ironically, where the ceremony ends; the Best Picture category, which this year includes some real gems. In terms of bookies favourite, Richard Linklater's Boyhood seems to be winning this particular race and it's hard to not understand why, with it's quite remarkable telling of one child's experience growing up over the course of 12 real-life years. It's emotional. It's brilliantly acted. What more do you want? In terms of my own personal choice, Whiplash is the film that surprised me the most out of all the nominees, with it gripping me throughout, helped particularly by a striking performance from J.K. Simmons. In regards to overlooked films, I believe Under the Skin, Calvary, and even Guardians of the Galaxy, all should have been under consideration. Instead we have these:

American Sniper
Birdman
Boyhood
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Selma
The Imitation Game
The Theory of Everything
Whiplash

Next... Best Actor

Film Review: Foxcatcher

Brother's Grimm

It's award season everyone! On the day I am writing this, the Golden Globes is set to descend upon us with the majestic two-hour red carpet special lying in wait along with my pot of coffee and sugar-filled lemonade. Cheers time zones. Of the films listed in the "Best Films" category, Foxcatcher, Selma, and The Theory of Everything, are the only ones I hadn't seen when the nominations were announced so I decided to catch up when they were released in UK cinemas, starting with Foxcatcher. Foxcatcher brings to life the true story of Jon Du Pont, played by Steve Carell, and his efforts in hiring the Olympic wrestling champions Mark and Dave Schultz, played by Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo respectively, to train under the "Foxcatcher" estate and ready a team for the 1988 Olympics. Although, from this short synopsis anyway, Foxcatcher seems to be primarily a sports film, the reality is that Foxcatcher is a different monster entirely. 

 When I first watched the trailer to Foxcatcher, I was astonished at the transformation of Carell, whose unrecognisable performance as Du Pont is undeniably the best feature of the film, with his character's eerie presence and ambiguous nature symbolising the tone I felt the film was trying to convey throughout its' two hour run-time. Both Carell and Tatum portray characters that are undeniably against type, and I felt this only enhanced the film's strengths, as it's dark and grim tone was unexpected, due in part to the fact that I had no previous knowledge of the events surrounding the story. 

Another strength of the film is Ruffalo's performance, who, like Carell, is nominated for a Golden Globe, yet what stuck me most about the film was it's clear emphasis on the notion of family, with themes throughout focusing on brotherhood, paternal and maternal instincts, as well as feelings of isolation, particularly in relation to Du Pont, whose Gatsby-esque wealth and fame, brings with it a sense of loneliness and despair, helped only by his unusual love for his very own Daisy Buchanan, in the form of Mark Schultz. 

Overall, Foxcatcher is a dark and twisted tale of one man's isolation which engaged me throughout. Its' grim nature and rather depressing feel may be too much for some, but in my opinion, Foxcatcher is a solid and surprising piece of cinema. Roll on the red carpet. 

Overall Score: 8/10

Film Review: Whiplash

The Sound of Drums

As an avid guitar player, I vividly remember watching the amazing Steve Vai battle against Ralph Macchio during the simply superb guitar duel at the end of the 1986' film, Crossroads (No, not the Britney Spears film). Soon after watching it, I was amazed to find out that Macchio was not entirely playing the guitar during the film and instead, the music was performed by Ry Cooder, yet to me, the performance by Macchio was really happening in front of me. Aside from the guitar duel, Crossroads was pretty pants, yet the knowledge that Macchio must have had intense training regarding where to place his fingers on the fret-board, when to strum, and when to make Vai-like facial expressions still amazes me to this day. After watching Whiplash, I felt, and still feel, the exact sense of sheer wonder I did the first time I saw that guitar duel, yet unlike Crossroads, Whiplash isn't pants. In fact, it's pretty much perfect.  

The plot of the film focuses on Andre Neiman, played by Miles Teller. a 19 year-old jazz drummer, who is taken under the wing of notorious teacher Terrence Fletcher, at renowned music school, Shaffer Conservatory, in order to fulfill his dreams of becoming a legend in musical history. Much like Macchio in Crossroads, Teller is flawless in attempting to present realistic and uncanny musical performances throughout the film, and even goes one better by perfectly portraying a character who literally combines blood, sweat and tears with total dedication into his musical ability. Following him all the way is J.K. Simmons', who surely must regard this as a career best performance, with his portrayal of Fletcher characterised by one moment, being undeniably cool and calm, and then suddenly morphing into this all-swearing, larger than life, musical monster who takes no prisoners, accepts no excuses, and will literally throw chairs at you for being slightly out of time with the rest of his band. 

Aside from the two actors, another winner in this film is surely Tom Cross, whose editing within the film allows Teller's performance to propel into greatness, and it is good to see that he has been recognised by the BAFTA's for such outstanding work which surely means an Oscar nomination is set to land at his feet. Good job. Obviously the soundtrack is brilliant, with it already being on my wish-list, but what truly exceeds in this film is it's hard-hitting nature in its' attempt to show characters whose lives are not only engulfed by their passion and love for the music, but will do almost anything to keep that feeling flowing, evidenced during the very last performance within the film in which both Teller and Fletcher give a performance worthy of endless applause and shouts for just one more. 

Overall, Whiplash is a brilliant piece of cinema, packed full with spot-on performances, not only from the actors, but by editor, Tom Cross, a brilliant soundtrack, and a sense of wonder which gripped me from start to finish. Can I have an encore? 

Overall Score: 10/10

  

Film Review: Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

The Phoenix Rises

When it comes to films, I try and stay hidden from advance reviews in order to always go into the cinema with an open mind and thus, be unaware of what anyone has said about the film before I have seen it. Unfortunately for the case of Birdman, this was unavoidable. After seeing a range of films in the cinema over Christmas, a Birdman trailer was always guaranteed along with the many 5 star reviews that are presented to you during its' run-time. Because of this, I went into the screening of Birdman with my expectation level moderately high yet, once the film had finished, it is fair to say I wasn't disappointed. 

In terms of plot, Micheal Keaton plays Riggan Thompson, a washed-up Hollywood star famous for playing the role of superhero 'Birdman' who, at an attempt to get his career back on track, takes a shot at Broadway by means of writing, directing, and starring in an adaptation of the short story What We Talk About When We Talk About Love  by Raymond Carver, an idol of Thompson's. Unbeknownst to anyone else, Thompson is plagued by the subconscious voice of Birdman, who, along with a faltering family and disruptive cast, place Thompson's life and career firmly in the balance. 

Firstly, it is fair to say that Birdman is something unlike anything else I think I have ever seen before within cinematic history, with its' mix of genres, (Is it a drama? Black comedy? Satire? Superhero movie?) fantastic cinematography, (by Oscar-winning Emmanuel Lubezki who won the award for Gravity) and a brilliantly barmy plot performed perfectly by an equally superb ensemble cast. Secondly, Keaton is excellent (I am running out of superlatives) as Thompson and should easily be recognised within the upcoming awards season, even if I couldn't help but draw parallels between his character's life and his own (Keaton played Batman in the Tim Burton films). Lastly, the satirical notions regarding cinema in today's society were greatly emphhasised and executed throughout the film, particularly the scene with a fancy dress Iron Man fighting Spider-Man which, in my opinion, was rather splendid. The films' two hour running time, in general, went quickly, although I

 felt there seemed to be too many scenes where the film was set to end and then quickly carried on, yet this didn't deter the utter joy I felt whilst watching it.  

Overall, Birdman is a brilliant, barmy, and bonkers piece of cinema which no doubt will end up somewhere in my Top Ten films of 2015. Keaton is superb. The visuals are stunning. The plot is splendid.  RIP Batman, long live Birdman. 

Overall Score: 9/10

Film Review: Enemy

You Only Live Twice...

A film starring Jake Gyllenhaal always seems to attract me, and it always will do, due to the knowledge that Gyllenhaal portrayed one of my favourite characters in one of my all-time favourite films. That film was Donnie Darko, a film so unlike anything I had seen before in my lifetime when it was released, a film that had endless meaning, a film which featured an awesome soundtrack, capped off with a perfect performance by Gyllenhaal as the titular character. Now we have Enemy, the second film from the Gyllenhaal/Villeneuve partnership, filmed instantly after the completion of their first effort, Prisoners, in 2013, and boy, is it a weird one. 

In terms of the plot, Gyllenhaal plays history teacher, Adam Bell, a man whose life seems to be going nowhere and is stuck on repeat, whilst his relationship with Melanie Laurent's character, Mary, follows suit, and is seemingly only held together by the physical aspect it brings with it. During one evening, Bell watches a film recommended to him by another teacher, named, Where There's a Will There's a Way, and sees someone physically identical to him starring in the film. That's where I will end the plot synopsis, as what follows is a film laced with mystery, suspense and downright creepiness, in a vein which reminded me of works by David Lynch, particularly Mulholland Dr., bubble-wrapped with notions of identity, totalitarianism and arachnophobia, particularly for me.   

Features of the film include top-notch performances, particularly from Gyllenhaal, who practically has to play two completely different roles, a heavy sense of surrealism, accompanied by an almost grunge-esque feel to the film, and an ending which freaked me out so much, I had to lie down and digest slowly what had occurred before my eyes. On the bad side, the film obviously won't appeal to a mass audience, with its' ambiguous tone throughout leaving a range of questions unanswered, whilst the dark colours of the film sometimes required me to peer nose-first into my screen in order to figure out what was happening and bring clarity to the situation. 

Overall, Enemy is dark, bizarre, and features an ending that will shock almost everyone. Honestly, i'm still shaking. I believe it is a better film than Prisoners and will take some beating to not be in my Films of the Year List for 2015. Please feel free to comment on your feelings, ideas, and meaning of the film and I hope you enjoy it as much as i did and remember, "chaos is order yet undeciphered." 

Overall Score: 9/10

  

Film Review: The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death

Won't Someone Think of the Children...?

Firstly, I am thrilled that The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death is rated a 15. The first feeling that comes to mind when someone mentions Woman in Black is that of dread. Nightmarish dread that was caused not by the film, but the screaming and shouting of Harry Potter fans that were in the same screening as i when the first Woman in Black was released in 2012 due to the BBFC granting the film a 12 certificate and thus, allowing avid Daniel Radcliffe/Potter fans to see their beloved up on the screen once again. Unfortunately for me, this resulted in hysterical screaming, constant talking, and the occasional REALLY LOUD fits of laughter, distracting me from what I thought, in the end, was a rather solid and spooky adaptation of Susan Hill's 1983 horror novella. What a joy then to see not only a sequel that featured no one of "fangirl" capabilities starring in it, but a 15 classification, wiping the fundamental existence of screaming youths from my cinema. Great start. 

Now I have seen the film, my early prediction of screaming youths being all but eradicated from the showing was misjudged and unfortunately, I was sat amongst what i feared most from a cinematic audience. Screaming. Shouting. Idle talking about where the film was going. The 15 certificate clearly had not completely solved the problem of the first film, and with this, I left the film deeply upset and rather annoyed. Anyway, how was the film i hear you ask? In a word or two; rather mediocre. In terms of plot, teacher Eve Parkins, played pretty well by Phoebe Fox, is evacuated, along with a group of children, including Edward, played by a Damian-esque Oaklee Pendergast, to Eel Marsh house during World War II, where they are greeted with strange noises, disappearing children, and a non-convincing performance by Jeremy Irvine as a supposedly discharged war pilot suffering from PTSD. What follows is a 90 minute mash-up of jump scares, complete darkness, and a feeling that I had seen this movie once before. 

Don't get me wrong, I love a good jump scare, but when they are so obviously going to happen it detracts from the overall power of fear they are attempting to bring, and such a problem was evident throughout the course of the film. In fact, the only time I felt partially threatened by the titular character was during the last ten minutes of the movie when there is a certain ambiguity to what was going to occur, yet for a supposed horror movie, 10 minutes out of 90 doesn't cut the mustard in my book. On the positive side, the child performers are good, particularly the character of Edward, the dark, Gothic tone of the film is present throughout and never lets off, and the film successfully tells a story, albeit a plot pretty similar to the first film, within a sensible amount of time.

In conclusion, The Woman in Black: Angel of Death, doesn't quite match the heights of the first film, and if anything, resembles too much of the plot and tone from it, resulting in a film that can only be classed as 'more of the same'. The endless jump scares may excite some horror fans, but in my mind such parlor tricks are cheap and un-imaginative resulting in an overall feeling of content, but not in anyway excitement or horror. 

Overall Score: 6/10 

Film Review: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

One Last Time...?

Here we are at last. After 726 minutes of Lord of the Rings (I'm including the extended Blu-Ray editions as i recently watched them all) and 343 minutes of The Hobbit so far (once again, the extended editions) we have the final installment of our journey through middle-earth. What a ride it has been. Shall we do it one last time? 

The Hobbit series so far hasn't at all gripped me in ways that LOTR did. I found An Unexpected Journey way too long, yet a solid start, and although The Desolation of Smaug was a much improved addition to the Middle Earth saga, it still stood in the shadow of all films within the LOTR trilogy. Now we have The Battle of Five Armies, a film that starts with a superb opening scene following on from the conclusion of the previous film, in which the monstrous Smaug descends upon Laketown with death, and death in huge numbers, in mind. Ironically, the epicness and awe-inspiring first section of the film is never really surpassed in the two hours that followed.

In terms of the good, the first is that the film is much shorter than the previous offerings resulting in a better pace as well as eradicating the feeling that the story was dragging on, something which I had felt particularly in the first film. Secondly, Richard Armitage is fantastic as Thorin, and in my view stole the show portraying a character battling with his inner demons in a way not too dissimilar from the effects of the one ring, although this inadvertently results in Freeman's perfect portrayal of Bilbo almost being sidelined. Other positive points include the way in which Christopher Lee, aged 92, can still kick shadowy butt, and the way in which the film nicely rounds off the middle-earth saga by leading the audience straight into The Fellowship of the Ring. 

Now for the bad. For some reason, the makers of The Hobbit Trilogy have gone CGI crazy, particularly within this last installment, and for me the sheer amount of reliance on such sadly reduces the feeling of epicness i should have been feeling. CGI orcs? Not needed. The orcs in LOTR were brilliant. Why change that? CGI Dain? WHY? You could have easily just asked for Billy Connolly to be in the film directly, yet instead, Mr Jackson or whoever believes his voice is all that is needed and a computer generated version is much better. No. The over-use of CGI also results in the film looking like a video game in some occasions, with some scenes looking like they have been lifted from last years' Shadow of Mordor. Other minor problems included Orlando Bloom looking very scary as a post-plastic surgery looking Legolas, some cheesy love-in moments, and an overall sense of repetitiveness during the titular battle. 

In conclusion, The Battle of the Five Armies has rounded off the middle-earth saga in a solid, yet strangely unspectacular fashion, featuring a brilliant opening scene as well as a stand-out performance from Armitage, weakened by an over-reliance on CGI and a feeling of repetitiveness throughout the battle sequences. Farewell Middle-Earth. It's been emotional.  

Overall Score: 7/10

Film Review: The Interview

Kim Jong Eurghhh...

What is the essence of comedy I hear you ask? In my own view, comedy relies on the importance of timing and delivery in order to effectively produce laughs. British humour is the greatest humour in the world, (No Bias Intended) highlighted by famous British comedy shows/films such as Monty Python, Fawlty Towers and most recently the Thick of It which is easily the funniest and most intelligent comedy show I have seen in the 21st century. My overall feeling after watching The Interview, was that comedy has died. And in a bad way, as well as feeling that  there is a clear target audience which, in my view, consists of young males, between the ages of 12 and 15, who will find Rogen/Franco's new film unbelievably funny whereas I, who is reaching their 21st birthday, found it distasteful, crude and a complete waste of time. The rant continues...

In terms of plot, Franco plays a non-likable caricature, symbolising the  laddish-culture that seeps through a range of films and TV programmes that are ripe in society today, who is tasked with Rogen's "Samwise" to Franco's "Frodo", character in bringing down the "most famous man alive," Kim-Jong Un, after they are both invited to interview him in North Korea. What follows is a 115 minute orgy of racism, swearing, violence and casual misogyny which most importantly, is not in anyway funny, but instead made me wish I had been bombed during the showing as it would have saved me the pain of following the film all the way until the credits came up. 

Anyone who is alive will have been aware of the impending bomb threat North Korea have sanctioned in response to the film and so far, I am still alive and well but that may soon change, 

meaning my last ever review may be on a film that is not only highly racist, but entirely lacks taste and charm, all of which I expect somewhere in a film classified as "comedy". The Interview, in a word then, is pants. Of the highest order, and is only prevented from 1/10 by the ONE smile I managed during the course of the film which was brought upon by the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel that featured in the film. Seriously, that was the best bit. A dog. Enjoy. 

Overall Score: 2/10